Does Sanchez still win the 98 French if Seles does not upsrt Hingis in the semis

[insideoutforehanders]

I personally doubt it. Hingis is such a horrible opponent for Sanchez Vicario I can't see her winning, even on clay, and even with Hingis a bit down on confidence and not playing great around then. Hingis wins her first French for sure if that is the final, or if Novotna beats Seles in their 3 set quarterfinal since while Jana beat Hingis easily at Wimbledon a month later, she was never beating her on clay.

 

[insideoutforehanders]

@buscemi and @BTURNER you are the WTA experts here. Must have some opinion on this?

 

[boredone3456]

I'd lean towards no, judging largely on the fact that Hingis flattened Vicario pretty routinely in the 97 QF.

 

[insideoutforehanders]

I'd lean towards no, judging largely on the fact that Hingis flattened Vicario pretty routinely in the 97 QF.

In fairness to Sanchez Vicario, Hingis was playing much better and much more confident in 97 than around mid 98. The French Open in 97 generally was one of Hingis's worst forms of all of 97, but still better than her mid 98 form. And Sanchez was really bad in 97, and much better in 98. Even with that I still agree. Hingis still won all their matches even this year (1998) too.

 

[bluetrain4]

I'd lean towards no, judging largely on the fact that Hingis flattened Vicario pretty routinely in the 97 QF.

Flip side, she often flattened Seles (they had a very odd H2H), yet Seles took her apart in the SFs. Double flip side, ASV has a different skill set than Monica - and while Hingis took apart ASV in the French quarters in 97 as you note, Seles lost to Hingis in a tough 3-setter in the 97 SFs. Tough for Seles, 1998 may have been her last great chance at a Slam. To handily beat Hingis, whom she had a LOT of trouble with, and then lose to ASV, whom she had a great record against, and whom she won the second set against 6-0, much have really hurt.

One thing about ASV, she was a great opportunist if someone would give her an inch. She didn't beat nobodies for her Slam titles - Graf, Graf, Pierce, Seles.

 

[buscemi]

In fairness to Sanchez Vicario, Hingis was playing much better and much more confident in 97 than around mid 98. The French Open in 97 generally was one of Hingis's worst forms of all of 97, but still better than her mid 98 form. And Sanchez was really bad in 97, and much better in 98. Even with that I still agree. Hingis still won all their matches even this year (1998) too.

I'm picking Hingis here for some of the reasons listed above.

I also question your assessment of Hingis's form at the time of the 1997 French Open vs. at the time of the 1998 French Open.

1997 was when Hingis had her horse riding accident, and she looked really rough in a few of her matches at the French. Gloria Pizzichini was a point away from a 6-3, 5-3 lead against her in the second round, and then there was that bizarre match with Paulus where they traded bagels in sets 2 & 3. That was the match right before Hingis trounced ASV.

OTOH, in 1998, Hingis raced to the titles at Hamburg and the Italian Open, only dropping 1 set across both events (to Venus in the final of the latter event). I'm guessing you're focusing on the surprising loss to Kournikova at the German Open, but Martina followed up on that by easily winning 10 straight sets before Seles found some of her old magic to take her down in the SF. Hingis's play was then pretty spotty for the rest of the season, but I recall her looking pretty good during the clay court stretch.

 

[insideoutforehanders]

I'm picking Hingis here for some of the reasons listed above.

I also question your assessment of Hingis's form at the time of the 1997 French Open vs. at the time of the 1998 French Open.

1997 was when Hingis had her horse riding accident, and she looked really rough in a few of her matches at the French. Gloria Pizzichini was a point away from a 6-3, 5-3 lead against her in the second round, and then there was that bizarre match with Paulus where they traded bagels in sets 2 & 3. That was the match right before Hingis trounced ASV.

OTOH, in 1998, Hingis raced to the titles at Hamburg and the Italian Open, only dropping 1 set across both events (to Venus in the final of the latter event). I'm guessing you're focusing on the surprising loss to Kournikova at the German Open, but Martina followed up on that by easily winning 10 straight sets before Seles found some of her old magic to take her down in the SF. Hingis's play was then pretty spotty for the rest of the season, but I recall her looking pretty good during the clay court stretch.

I just feel she was low on confidence and ripe for the picking around then. Yes the Kournikova loss. The very easy loss to Novotna at Wimbledon weeks later even after Jana started sluggish and nervous and nearly went down 4-0 to start. Nearly losing to baby Serena who wasn't that good yet in Miami. The shock blowout loss to Seles. And watching her play she looked more tentative, error prone, and low on confidence than any point in 97, yes even the 97 RG event which was her worst slam performance by far of 97 even had she won. Not ripe enough for her ultimate pigeon Sanchez to beat her though I think. Even on clay.

 

[Angrybirdstar]

One thing about ASV, she was a great opportunist if someone would give her an inch. She didn't beat nobodies for her Slam titles - Graf, Graf, Pierce, Seles.

to make an imperfect analogy, i personally feel like ASV was a Wilander type, in that she was GOATed at encouraging and moderately inducing those ceded inches, but people view her as a Murray type who needed those inches to be outright given away, and i can't really agree. feels like that angle relies a lot on overinterpreting her h2hs with Graf and Seles

 

[insideoutforehanders]

to make an imperfect analogy, i personally feel like ASV was a Wilander type, in that she was GOATed at encouraging and moderately inducing those ceded inches, but people view her as a Murray type who needed those inches to be outright given away, and i can't really agree. feels like that angle relies a lot on overinterpreting her h2hs with Graf and Seles

It isn't just her head to head with Graf and Seles. Graf is in fact probably her most impressive head to head. Her head to head with Hingis who has only 1 more slam than her, yet is 2-18 against. Her 3-12 vs a very old, past her prime Navratilova. Her numerous losing records with 1 or 2 slam winners.

 

[martinezownsclay]

I'm picking Hingis here for some of the reasons listed above.

I also question your assessment of Hingis's form at the time of the 1997 French Open vs. at the time of the 1998 French Open.

1997 was when Hingis had her horse riding accident, and she looked really rough in a few of her matches at the French. Gloria Pizzichini was a point away from a 6-3, 5-3 lead against her in the second round, and then there was that bizarre match with Paulus where they traded bagels in sets 2 & 3. That was the match right before Hingis trounced ASV.

OTOH, in 1998, Hingis raced to the titles at Hamburg and the Italian Open, only dropping 1 set across both events (to Venus in the final of the latter event). I'm guessing you're focusing on the surprising loss to Kournikova at the German Open, but Martina followed up on that by easily winning 10 straight sets before Seles found some of her old magic to take her down in the SF. Hingis's play was then pretty spotty for the rest of the season, but I recall her looking pretty good during the clay court stretch.

I saw Hingis's matches with Kournikova, her 2 clay matches with Venus (who wasn't a good clay courter yet at all), and her semi final with Seles at Roland Garros, and I wouldn't say she looked good in even a single of those. For her standards her best in any of those would be mediocre, and the Kournikova match I would say was terrible, which she would have to be to lose to freaking Kournikova anyway. I would not say she was in good form at the time.

 

[buscemi]

I saw Hingis's matches with Kournikova, her 2 clay matches with Venus (who wasn't a good clay courter yet at all), and her semi final with Seles at Roland Garros, and I wouldn't say she looked good in even a single of those. For her standards her best in any of those would be mediocre, and the Kournikova match I would say was terrible, which she would have to be to lose to freaking Kournikova anyway. I would not say she was in good form at the time.

But how do you compare Hingis's form to her form at the 1997 French Open, after the horse riding accident? For me, the latter was pretty poor, especially in the two matches I noted.

 

[Mustard]

On paper, Seles should beat Sanchez Vicario in the 1998 French Open final, even with Sanchez Vicario seeded at number 4 and Seles seeded at number 6. They play the matches for a reason.

 

[bluetrain4]

to make an imperfect analogy, i personally feel like ASV was a Wilander type, in that she was GOATed at encouraging and moderately inducing those ceded inches, but people view her as a Murray type who needed those inches to be outright given away, and i can't really agree. feels like that angle relies a lot on overinterpreting her h2hs with Graf and Seles

That's a fair point. She shouldn't have to be totally viewed as an "it was all on her opponent's racket" type. That makes it seem like "she only wins if her better opponents aren't playing they're best." Which may be true to an extent, but as you point out, ASV could affirmatively do things to prevent players from playing their best; it wasn't always a case of her opponents just magically being off for no reason. Yes, she has some dismal H2Hs, but those players were simply better overall. ASV was still great and on a given day could, as you say, "induce the ceded inches."

 

[Gizo]

When Hingis lost at RG, she was typically overpowered and hit off the court. ASV didn’t have the power to do that, and Hingis was able to pick her apart with her famed ball control and anticipation. A player on the downward trajectory in her career as ASV was at that stage, without a great deal of ‘first strike firepower’ was typically a lamb to the slaughter up against a prime Hingis.

Match-up wise everything was in Hingis's favour. Then again she would be bidding to win the one major that eluded her, up against an opponent that that won the competition twice before and was appearing in her 6th final in 10 years there. Nerves could well have been a factor - if she controlled those (no cast-iron guarantee there), then she'd win.

I didn't really remember a great deal of talk about Hingis potentially holding all 4 majors at the same time at RG in 1998 (some mentions but not a lot). While it surely would have been brought up more had she reached the final, it was a very different story compared to Serena at the 2003 Australian Open. In that case I remember a great deal of talk about Serena having the opportunity to hold all 4 majors pre-tournament, and during the early rounds including when she struggled against Loit in R1.

Hingis having a Wimbledon title but no RG title, does seem like sort of an 'aberration' to me - it would have made more sense had it been the other way around. Then again that 'aberration' wasn't difficult to explain given that the grass court field in 1997 wasn't exactly a strong one. The overall grass court field noticeably hollowed out during the early to mid 90s and became noticeably less strong than the clay court field (before the likes of Davenport and Venus properly found their groove and the tide turned back again). Previously in women's tennis it had typically been the other way around. And to compound things Novotna had an abdominal muscle injury in the 1997 Wimbledon final as well.

 

[martinezownsclay]

But how do you compare Hingis's form to her form at the 1997 French Open, after the horse riding accident? For me, the latter was pretty poor, especially in the two matches I noted.

Fair point I guess. At the 97 French I sort of felt she played 2 really awful matchez, Pizzichini and the final vs Majoli. Against Paulus, I agree with Evert she tanked the 2nd set (as ridiculous as that is). She definitely wasnt nearly as good at the 97 French as she was any other tournament the first 9 months of 97. At the time of the 98 French she was just shaky and low in confidence in general, I agree with insideoutforehand on that. But at the time of the actual 97 French itself she was probably playing worse than the 98 French, if you are looking at only that event and nothing else.

 

[pierceforehands]

On paper, Seles should beat Sanchez Vicario in the 1998 French Open final, even with Sanchez Vicario seeded at number 4 and Seles seeded at number 6. They play the matches for a reason.

The question seems to be asking what most likely happens though. There isn't a single reason to think Sanchez would be likely to beat Hingis. And Hingis is by far her worst match up on tour, even far worse than Seles, despite the ultimate head to head (3-14 vs 2-18), not being that different. Anyone who followed their careers knows that Hingis is by far Sanchez's worst opponent, even over Seles who is also a very bad match up for her, and nobody else comes close, Watching their matches almost felt embarassing for Sanchez, you felt like she should pull her panties down in shame during the match or something. It is really pretty simple too, the ONLY way to beat prime Hingis ever is to overpower her, and Sanchez obviously isn't a powerful hitter and can't overpower Hingis who hits harder than her, so her path to potential victory doesn't even exist anywhere. Seles despite her own bad head to head with Hingis, does have the potential to do this on a really "on" day, especialy if Hingis is a bit off, so is nothing like Sanchez in having no game to bother Hingis. Then as for Sanchez Vicario with Seles there are things she can try and a potential path to winning always, despite the bad head to head, frustrating the big hitting Seles with amazing retrieving and making her hit numerous winners, hoping that will draw enough unforced errors, her task vs all other huge hitters she faces; plus using lots of drop shots and exposing Seles's non great mobility, especialy moving forward. So all 3 of those match ups (Seles vs Hingis, Sanchez vs Seles, Sanchez vs Hingis) all 3 have one with a clear winning edge, and 2 of those 3 match ups occured at this French, with the person with the decisive losing record winning, but in only 1 of those match ups is the person with the losing record absolutely hopeless in the match up, and that is Sanchez vs Hingis. Against Hingis there is literally nothing she can do that could be effective given her game, and if you watched any of their matches it shows as she looks lost and confused for the most part, which again you never see in Sanchez vs Seles or Seles vs Hingis, even for the person with the lopsided losing record, even in some of the lopsided losses. Should be noted too one of Sanchez's 2 wins over Hingis was a 3 set win, including losing a bagel set, to 15 year old Hingis who was ranked outside the top 10, and meaningless. The other was one of their final ever matches when Sanchez finally out of the blue scored her first win over Hingis in 5 years or something.

 

[pierceforehands]

to make an imperfect analogy, i personally feel like ASV was a Wilander type, in that she was GOATed at encouraging and moderately inducing those ceded inches, but people view her as a Murray type who needed those inches to be outright given away, and i can't really agree. feels like that angle relies a lot on overinterpreting her h2hs with Graf and Seles

I would agree with what you were saying if you did not throw Murray's name in there. No way you are seriously arguing Murray compares unfavorably to Sanchez, or is less of a threat to top players than Sanchez Vicario is. Since that would be crazy.

 

[Tennfan123]

No. Hingis would routine ASV 3 and 4. How different her career might have been with all that confidence such a win would have given her.